The justification of grammatical categories
What is the theoretical justification for positing such constructs as conjugation classes, declension classes, parts of speech, grammatical gender, and agreement rules? This paper argues that no grammatical category or construct should be taken as an a priori given; each must be justified by the demonstration that it solves a distributional problem. This is the core analytical principle upon which Columbia School linguistics rests, and it is responsible for much that is innovative in Ricardo Otheguy’s grammatical and sociolinguistic research. The novel analytical consequences of this principle will be illustrated by applying it to the distributional problem of the different co-occurrence patterning of such apparent synonyms as blanca and blanco in Spanish.
Article outline
- Part I
- Introduction
- Rethinking the foundations of linguistics
- The theory of the sentence
- The pre-theoretical problem: The acoustic asymmetry of vocal sound
- The theory-defined problem: The distribution of signals
- Description and explanation in linguistic analysis
- Part II
- Introduction
- First example: Conjugation classes in Spanish
- Second example: Declension classes in Latin
- Third example: Nouns and verbs
- Nouns and verbs as semantic categories
- Fourth example: gender classes
- The analysis of Otheguy and Stern (2000)
- Gender classes in Spanish
- The need to posit a communicative strategy
- Strategy or rule?
- The need to posit a second communicative strategy
- Hypotheses about mental grammar
- Analytical indeterminacy
- Summary
- The puzzle of grammatical gender for a functionalist
- The unification of otheguy’s two strands of research
-
Notes
-
References
References (34)
References
Ahumada, M. (1908). Reglamento para corridas de toros y novilladas. México, Jalisco.
Barber, C. (1993). The English Language: A historical introduction. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Cameron, R. (1995). The scope and limits of switch reference as a constraint on pronominal subject expression. Hispanic Linguistics, 6, 1–27.
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Contini-Morava, E. (2002). (What) do noun class markers mean? In W. Reid, R. Otheguy, & N. Stern (Eds.), Signal, meaning, and message (pp. 3–64). Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
Diver, W. (1995). Theory. In E. Contini-Morava & B. S. Goldberg (Eds.), Meaning as explanation: Advances in linguistic sign theory (pp. 43–114). Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter.
Diver, W. (2012/1979). Phonology as human behavior. In A. Huffman & J. Davis (Eds.), Language: Communication and human behavior (pp. 293–321). Leiden/Boston, MA: Brill.
Diver, W. (2012a). The subjunctive without syntax. In A. Huffman & J. Davis (Eds.), Language: Communication and human behavior (pp. 183–194). Leiden/Boston, MA: Brill.
Diver, W. (2012b). Avoidance of the obvious. In A. Huffman & J. Davis (Eds.), Language: Communication and human behavior (pp. 444–519). Leiden/Boston, MA: Brill.
Diver, W. (2012c). The dual. In A. Huffman & J. Davis (Eds.), Language: Communication and human behavior (pp. 87–99). Leiden/Boston, MA: Brill.
Diver, W., & Davis, J. (2012). Latin voice and case. In A. Huffman & J. Davis (Eds.), Language: Communication and human behavior (pp. 247–264). Leiden/Boston, MA: Brill.
Diver, W., Davis, J., & Reid, W. (2012). Traditional grammar and its legacy in Twentieth-century linguistics. In A. Huffman & J. Davis (Eds.), Language: Communication and human behavior (pp. 371–443). Leiden/Boston, MA: Brill.
García, E. (1975). The role of theory in linguistic analysis: The Spanish pronoun system. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Co.
García, E., & Otheguy, R. (1983). Being polite in Ecuador: Strategy reversal under language contact. Lingua, 61, 103–132.
Goldberg, B. S. (1991). A semantic analysis of the Spanish subjunctive with a special consideration of the endings -ra and -se (Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University).
Goldberg, B. S. (1995). The –ra and –se opposition in Spanish. In E. Contini-Morava (Ed.), Meaning as explanation: Advances in linguistic sign theory (pp. 381–404). Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter.
Huffman, A. (2006). Diver’s theory. In J. Davis, R. J. Gorup, & N. Stern (Eds.), Advances in functional linguistics: Columbia school beyond its origins (pp. 41–62). Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
Isac Sánchez, Juan José (2012). El hombre que sólo podía quedarse un ratito. Madrid: Visión Libros.
Joos, Martin (Ed.). (1957). Readings in linguistics: The development of descriptive linguistics in America since 1925. Washington, DC: American Council of Learned Societies.
Klein-Andreu, F. (1983). Grammar in style: Spanish adjective placement. In F. Klein-Andrew (Ed.), Discourse perspectives on syntax (pp. 143–179). New York, NY/London: Academic Press.
Otheguy, R. (1976). The meaning of Spanish el, la, and lo
(Doctoral dissertation, City University of New York).
Otheguy, R. (2015). Variationist sociolinguistics and linguistic theory in the context of pronominal perseveration. In R. T. Cacoullos, N. Dion, & A. Lapierre (Eds.), Linguistic variation: Confronting fact and theory (pp. 319–334). Abingdon: Routledge Publishers.
Otheguy, R., & Lapidus, N. (2005). Matización de la teoría de la simplificación en las lenguas en contacto: El concepto de la adaptación en el español de Nueva York. In L. López & M. Lacorte (Eds.), Contactos y contextos lingüísticos: El español en Estados Unidos y en contacto con otras lenguas (pp. 143–160). Madrid & Frankfurt: Editorial Iberoamericana/Vervuert Verlag.
Otheguy, R., & Zentella, A. C. (2012). Spanish in New York: Language contact, dialectal leveling and structural continuity. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Piglia R. (1980/2001). Respiración artificial. Barcelona: Editorial Anagrama.
Reid, W. (1991). Verb and noun number in English: A functional explanation. London/New York, NY: Longman.
Reid, W. (2011). The communicative function of English verb number. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 29, 1087–1146.
Rey, Alfonso (2005). El escándalo de Julia. Madrid: Huerga y Fierro.
Sabar, N. (2018). A meaning hypothesis to explain speakers’ choice of the sign look. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
Segarra Berenguer, M. (2006). Cruces de seda. Alicante, Spain: Editorial Club Universitario.
Zubin, D., & Köpcke, K. -M. (1981). Gender: A less than arbitrary grammatical category. Chicago Linguistic Society, 17, 439–449.
Cited by (3)
Cited by three other publications
Otheguy, Ricardo & Naomi L. Shin
2022.
A Columbia School Perspective on Explanation in Morphosyntactic Variation. In
Explanations in Sociosyntactic Variation,
► pp. 90 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.